Face it: Privacy is dead

When people really want to keep their data secret, they invest heavily in the infrastructure to do so. The intelligence community went to the expense of building its own alternate networks to keep their data safe (so long as they’re not broken by construction crews in Tyson’s Corner, VA). It also forbids the use of cell phones, cameras, and even CD players in its intel facilities. When they were not prohibited, like at Bradley Manning’s base in Iraq, a massive breach occurred.

Yet that sort of security is not available to an average person. What we’ll see is something cheaper and probably less effective.

Look at your own home as an analogy. Your home is not terribly secure — anyone with sufficient know-how and some moderately priced equipment can break in without your ever knowing about it. (There was even a popular Discovery Channel show about it.) Most people don’t rely on having an impenetrable house to safeguard their privacy. Instead, we rely on norms against breaking and entering, along with laws that punish perpetrators to deter theft.

We’ve also built better doors and locks, lower-cost alarm systems to scare off casual thieves, and increased the capacity of local police to forensically examine a broken-into house for clues. It wasn’t just a question of changing technology and expectations, but also of evolving law enforcement and deterrence.